alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1037 

To expand the provisions for termination of mandatory purchase requirements 

under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 22, 2015 

Mr. RISCH introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To expand the provisions for termination of mandatory purchase requirements under the Public Utility Regulatory 

Policies Act of 1978. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. RECOGNITION OF STATE DETERMINATIONS. 

4 Section 210(m) of the Public Utility Regulatory Poli5 cies Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 824a–3(m)) is amended— 

6 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), (5), 

7 (6), and (7) as paragraphs (4), (5), (6), (7), and 

8 (8), respectively; 

9 (2) by inserting after paragraph (2) the fol10 lowing: 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1037 IS

1 ‘‘(3) STATE DETERMINATION.—After the date 

2 of enactment of this paragraph, no electric utility 

3 shall be required to enter into a new contract or ob4 ligation to purchase electric energy from a qualifying 

5 cogeneration facility or a qualifying small power pro6 duction facility under this section if the State regu7 latory agency having ratemaking authority over the 

8 electric utility has determined that the electric utility 

9 has no need to acquire additional generation re10 sources in order to meet its obligation to serve cus11 tomers in the public interest.’’; 

12 (3) in paragraph (4) (as so redesignated)— 

13 (A) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘of 

14 this subsection’’; and 

15 (B) by inserting ‘‘or in paragraph (3)’’ 

16 after ‘‘paragraph (1)’’ each place it appears; 

17 and 

18 (4) in paragraph (5) (as so redesignated)— 

19 (A) in the first sentence, by striking 

20 ‘‘paragraph (3)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph 

21 (4)’’; 

22 (B) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘of 

23 this subsection’’; and 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1037 IS

1 (C) by inserting ‘‘or in paragraph (3)’’ 

2 after ‘‘paragraph (1)’’ each place it appears. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATE OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERPursuant to Section 906(a) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18United States Code**

The undersigned, being the Principal Financial Officerof Enbridge Energy Partners, L.P. (the “Partnership”), hereby certifies thatthe Partnership’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterlyperiod ended September 30, 2005, filed with the United States Securitiesand Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)), fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, and that information contained in suchQuarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Partnership.

Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906, orother document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thiswritten statement required by Section 906, has been provided to thePartnership and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
| Date: October 28, 2005 |                            |
|-----------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                        | /s/ MARK A. MAKI                |
|                        | Mark A. Maki                    |
|                        | *Vice President, Finance*       |
|                        | *(Principal Financial Officer)* |

 

----
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

                                           EXHIBIT 27
                                      FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE

                                       TREMONT ADVISERS, INC.
                                         MARCH 31, 1999

<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<LEGEND>
   
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS  UNAUDITED SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF MARCH 31, 1999 AND FOR THE QUARTER THEN
ENDED.  THIS  INFORMATION  IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY  REFERENCE TO SUCH
CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>
<CIK>     0000880320                        
<NAME>   Tremont Advisers, Inc.                   
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     US
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         2,173,500
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2,574,200
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (35,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               5,540,400
<PP&E>                                         1,268,100
<DEPRECIATION>                                  (728,400)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                11,290,900
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,893,600
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                          44,800
<OTHER-SE>                                     7,730,400
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  11,290,900
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               3,377,800
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,606,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  875,700
<INCOME-TAX>                                     290,100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              585,600
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                     585,600
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.13
        



                                 

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5291]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

            By Mr. AMODEI:
        H.R. 6184.
        Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       The constitutional authority on which this bill rests is 
     the power of Congress to make rules for the government and 
     regulation of the land and naval forces, as enumerated in 
     Article I, Section 8, Clause 14 of the United States 
     Constitution.
```
#### Green Sand Community Ass'n v. Hayward

18138

12/11/96

Vacated and Remanded
# C_2020399EN.01001301.xml

| 23.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/13

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 30 September 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Cour du travail de Liège — Belgium) — B. v Centre public d’action sociale de Liège

(Case C-233/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Directive 2008/115/EC - Return of illegally staying third-country nationals - Third-country national suffering from a serious illness - Return decision - Judicial remedy - Automatic suspensory effect - Conditions - Grant of social assistance - Articles 19 and 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union)

(2020/C 399/17)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Cour du travail de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: B.

Defendant: Centre public d’action sociale de Liège

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 5 and 13 of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, read in the light of Article 19(2) and Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, must be interpreted as meaning that a national court, hearing a dispute on social assistance, the outcome of which is linked to the possible suspension of the effects of a return decision taken in respect of a third-country national suffering from a serious illness, must hold that an action for annulment and suspension of that decision leads to automatic suspension of that decision, even though suspension of that decision does not result from the application of national legislation, where:

| — | that action contains arguments seeking to establish that the enforcement of that decision would expose that third-country national to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his or her state of health, which does not appear to be manifestly unfounded, and that |
| --- | --- |

—

that action contains arguments seeking to establish that the enforcement of that decision would expose that third-country national to a serious risk of grave and irreversible deterioration in his or her state of health, which does not appear to be manifestly unfounded, and that

| — | that legislation does not provide for any other remedy, governed by precise, clear and foreseeable rules, which automatically entail the suspension of such a decision. |
| --- | --- |

—

that legislation does not provide for any other remedy, governed by precise, clear and foreseeable rules, which automatically entail the suspension of such a decision.

---

(1)  OJ C 164, 13.5.2019.

---
**Order of the Court of First Instance (Fourth Chamber) of 3 November 2008 – Union nationale de l’apiculture française and Others
v Commission**

**(Case T-403/07)**

Action for annulment – Directive 91/414/EEC – Plant protection products – Directive 2007/52/EC – Not individually concerned – Inadmissibility

1.                     *Actions for annulment – Natural or legal persons – Measures of direct and individual concern to them (Art. 230, fourth para.,
EC; Council Directive No 91/414; Commission Directive No 2007/52) (see paras 39-52)*

2.                     *European Communities – Judicial review of the legality of the acts of the institutions – Measures of general scope – Need
for natural or legal persons to have recourse to a plea of illegality or a reference for a preliminary ruling on validity
(Arts 230, fourth para., EC, 234 EC and 241 EC) (see paras 53-55)*

3.                     *Preliminary rulings – Assessment of validity – Declaration of invalidity of a Community measure – Effects (Arts 233 EC and
234 EC) (see para 56)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment of Commission Directive 2007/52/EC of 16 August 2007 amending Council Directive 91/414/EEC to include ethoprophos, pirimiphos-methyl and fipronil as active substances (OJ 2007 L 214, p. 3). |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action as inadmissible; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders that there is no need to rule on the applications to intervene; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | Orders Union nationale de l’apiculture française, Deutscher Berufs- und Erwerbsimkerbund eV, Unione nazionale associazioni apicoltori italiani and Asociación Galega de Apicultura to bear their own costs and pay those incurred by the Commission. |
#### Dines v. Pacific Ins. Co., Ltd.

17433

4/24/95

Denied

893 P.2d 176
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-33708, 333-36556,333-83934, 333-100337, 333-100399, 333-100400, 333-101041, 333-105060, 333-107191, 333-107776,333-107777, 333-108560, 333-109593, 333-112783, 333-118687, 333-120548, 333-124318, 333-127727,333-128186, 333-130928, and 333-133435 on Form S-3 and Nos. 33-34451, 33-53010, 33-65061,333-06503, 333-06505, 333-06507, 333-06511, 333-90323, 333-31294, 333-55068, 333-61822, 333-62604,333-74890, 333-96663, 333-104532, 333-104533, 333-105059, 333-107778, 333-112514, 333-115638,333-115639, 333-126571, 333-126576, 333-141508, 333-144196, and 333-144197 on Form S-8 of ourreport dated March 14, 2008, relating to the 2007 consolidated financial statements of ZixCorporation and subsidiaries and our report dated March 14, 2008 relating to effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of ZixCorporation and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2007./s/ WHITLEY PENN LLPDallas, Texas
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-7185

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

ROGELIO CEVALLOS, a/k/a Roger Cevallos, a/k/a

Richard Ruiz, a/k/a Ronnie,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior District Judge. (CR-94-275, CA-98-811-A)

Submitted: January 11, 2000 Decided: February 4, 2000

Before WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Rogelio Cevallos, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas More Hollenhorst, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on

March 8, 1999, the district court’s records show that it was

entered on the docket sheet on March 9, 1999. Pursuant to Rules 58

and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date

that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we

take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. See

Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Rogelio Cevallos appeals the district court’s orders denying

as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.

1999) and denying his motion for a certificate of appealability.

We have reviewed the record and the district court’s orders and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Cevallos, Nos. CR-94-275; CA-98-

811-A (E.D. Va. Mar. 9* and May 6, 1999). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
# Forms - Appalachian Regional Commission

- ARC Budget Revision Worksheet, Construction This worksheet must be filled out to request revisions to current ARC grants for construction projects.The post ARC Budget Revision Worksheet, Construction appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
# C_2019072EN.01003101.xml

| 25.2.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.2.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/31

---

Action brought on 6 December 2018 — Phrenos and Others v Commission

(Case T-715/18)

(2019/C 72/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: Phrenos SPRL (Mont-sur-Marchienne, Belgium), Akkanto (Watermael-Boitsfort, Belgium) and Operational Management Solutions (Chaumont-Gistoux, Belgium) (represented by: R. Jafferali and R. van Melsen, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the European Commission, as notified to the applicants by letter of 27 November 2018, to award the contract for services relating to the planning, preparation, promotion and implementation of the ‘European Development Days’ event for its Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (EuropeAid/139729/DH/SER/BE) (2018/S 144- 328417) for the years 2019 to 2022 inclusive, to a third party; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the European Commission, as notified to the applicants by letter of 27 November 2018, to award the contract for services relating to the planning, preparation, promotion and implementation of the ‘European Development Days’ event for its Directorate-General for International Cooperation and Development (EuropeAid/139729/DH/SER/BE) (2018/S 144- 328417) for the years 2019 to 2022 inclusive, to a third party;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the main and interim proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the main and interim proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to state reasons for its award decision. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to state reasons for its award decision.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to properly assess the (apparent) abnormally low prices of the chosen tender. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to properly assess the (apparent) abnormally low prices of the chosen tender.

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging infringement of equal treatment with regard to the assessment of the tenders submitted. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of equal treatment with regard to the assessment of the tenders submitted.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the award criterion for the evaluation of tenders applied by the defendant was illegal. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the award criterion for the evaluation of tenders applied by the defendant was illegal.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1034 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 66
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1034

  To designate the United States courthouse located at 501 East Court 
 Street in Jackson, Mississippi, as the ``Charles Clark United States 
                             Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 21, 2015

  Mr. Wicker introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

                              May 4, 2015

               Reported by Mr. Inhofe, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To designate the United States courthouse located at 501 East Court 
 Street in Jackson, Mississippi, as the ``Charles Clark United States 
                             Courthouse''.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CHARLES CLARK UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE.

    (a) Designation.--The United States courthouse located at 501 East 
Court Street in Jackson, Mississippi, shall be known and designated as 
the ``Charles Clark United States Courthouse''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the United States 
courthouse referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a 
reference to the ``Charles Clark United States Courthouse''.
                                                        Calendar No. 66

114th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1034

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To designate the United States courthouse located at 501 East Court 
 Street in Jackson, Mississippi, as the ``Charles Clark United States 
                             Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                              May 4, 2015

                       Reported without amendment
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THIS 
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS FOUND IN
THE COMPANY'S 10-Q FOR THE YEAR-TO-DATE, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      18,093,801
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               11,345,160
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (477,053)
<INVENTORY>                                  8,635,353
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,209,703
<PP&E>                                       6,232,878
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,597,031
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              66,629,027
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        8,597,754
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    47,039,262
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,992,011
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                66,629,027
<SALES>                                     34,741,648
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            34,741,648
<CGS>                                       15,261,910
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               27,504,095
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               171,486
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              95,067
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              7,710,300
<INCOME-TAX>                                 3,123,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          7,710,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 4,586,800
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .83
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1



             CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the following
Registration Statements and in the related prospectuses of our report dated
February 16, 1999 on the consolidated balance sheets of Sky Financial Group,
Inc. as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and the related consolidated statements
of income, comprehensive income, changes in shareholders' equity and cash flows
for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 1998; which report
is incorporated by reference into this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Form S-8 No. 333-67233
Form S-8 No. 333-47315 (Post-Effective Amendment No.1 on Form S-8 to Form S-4)
Form S-8 No. 333-60741 (Post Effective Amendment No.1 on Form S-8 to Form S-4)
Form S-3 No. 333-64127 (Filed as Citizens Bancshares, Inc.)
Form S-8 No. 333-18867 (Filed as Citizens Bancshares, Inc.)




                                  /s/ Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP

                                      Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP


Columbus, Ohio
March 10, 1999